ROCKET MAN'S PATTERN OF BEHAVIOUR SUGGESTS HE CUCKED TO A KREMLIN DEATH THREAT

One of these is Putin's little bitch.

Recent revelations by US intelligence sources suggest that tech billionaire Elon Musk radically changed his tune on Russia's brutal invasion of the Ukraine after receiving credible death threats from the Kremlin. 

Despite frequent denials from Musk, it appears that the owner of the pro-Russian social media platform Twitter is in regular contact with the Kremlin. and tries to be as accommodating as possible to Putin's agenda of blood-soaked state mafia imperialism. 

As reported by the Wall Street Journal: 

Elon Musk, the world’s richest man and a linchpin of U.S. space efforts, has been in regular contact with Russian President Vladimir Putin since late 2022.

The discussions, confirmed by several current and former U.S., European and Russian officials, touch on personal topics, business and geopolitical tensions.

At one point, Putin asked the billionaire to avoid activating his Starlink satellite internet service over Taiwan as a favor to Chinese leader Xi Jinping, said two people briefed on the request.

While there is some room for legitimate disagreements on the war in the Ukraine, Musk's behaviour is odd and highly suspicious, especially in light of the fact that he was originally strongly pro-Ukrainian and anti-Russian, like most fair-minded people, when the Ukraine was brutally attacked in early 2022:

After the Russian invasion in February 2022, Musk at first made strong public statements of support for Kyiv. He posted “Hold Strong Ukraine,” flanked by Ukrainian flags on what was then still known as Twitter. Shortly after, he jokingly challenged Putin to one-on-one combat over “Україна,” the Ukrainian language name for the country.

He followed up by donating several hundred Starlink terminals to Ukraine. By July some 15,000 terminals were providing free internet access to broad swaths of the country destroyed by the Russian attacks.

Then in late 2022, after receiving public criticism from the Russian government over Ukrainian use of his Starlink terminals, Musk completely and quite surprisingly changed his tune.

The only possible explanation for this is that he had received entirely credible death threats in private from representatives of the Russian state. 

Later that year, Musk’s view of the conflict appeared to change. In September, Ukrainian military operatives weren’t able to use Starlink terminals to guide sea drones to attack a Russian naval base in Crimea, the Black Sea peninsula Moscow had occupied since 2014. Ukraine tried to persuade Musk to activate the Starlink service in the area, but that didn’t happen, the Journal has reported.

His space company extended restrictions on the use of Starlink in offensive operations by Ukraine. [...] His moves coincided with public and private pressure from the Kremlin. [...] Later in 2022, Musk was having regular conversations with "high-level Russians," according to a person familiar with the interactions. At the time, there was pressure from the Kremlin on Musk’s businesses and "implicit threats against him," the person said.  At the same time, Musk increasingly took to Twitter, for which he was completing the purchase, to say SpaceX was losing money by funding the operation of the terminals. In October 2022, he asked his tens of millions of followers on X to vote on a pathway to peace that mirrored some aspects of the Kremlin’s offer to Ukraine at the time.

Such a radical change in "opinion" only makes sense if Musk is viewed as someone in imminent danger of being assassinated by Putin's network of killers.

In fairness it is hard to judge him too harshly for this, as taking out someone as public and high-profile as Musk would be well within the means of the Russian Deep State, and there would be little that the relatively weak US intelligence services could do to protect him.

Musk tweet before major pant-shitting incident

Musk tweet after major pant-shitting incident

CHINA TRIES TO FIND OUT IF THE NEXT US PRESIDENT WILL OPPOSE "RE-INTEGRATION" OF TAIWAN

Trump "boomertech" moment as China downloads all his Epstein-related sex tapes

China has been accused of hacking the phones of Donald Trump and JD Vance, who, according to betting markets and polls, look set to be the next President and Vice President of the USA.

As reported by the BBC: 

US authorities say cybercriminals linked to China may have attempted to tap into the phones or networks used by former President Donald Trump and his running mate, Senator JD Vance, a number of sources familiar with the matter confirmed to the BBC's US news partner, CBS News.

This reveals that Chinese intelligence clearly expect Trump to beat the unlikable and talentless Harris in the November Presidential election and are especially keen to find out whether the new administration will oppose China's plans, military or otherwise, to "re-integrate" the island of Taiwan back into China. 

America has created a situation of "strategic ambiguity" over Taiwan that constantly threatens to create a war. Back in 1979, the U.S. government recognized the government of the People's Republic of China (PRC or China) as the sole legal Government of all China, including Taiwan, but has constantly signalled that it would militarily support Taiwan if the Chinese government sought to assert its acknowledged sovereignty over the island state. 

Due to Trump's "America First" policy of increasing international isolationism, the Chinese believe that Trump may be the first US President who will not do anything to assist Taiwan if attacked. This latest hacking attack shows that they are keen to find out if this is the case. 

By prioritising consumer interests for short-term political reasons, past American governments have followed a "Chimerica" policy. This forced most of the world's production of semi-conductors to move to Taiwan due to its proximity to China's massive manufacturing sector. Back in 1979 when America commenced its "Chimerica" policy, most of the world's semi-conductors were produced in the relatively safe location of Japan. China's acquisition of Taiwan would thus mark its ascent over America as the most important and economically powerful state in the World.

IDIOTS WHO POOH-POOH IDEA OF KREMLIN INTERFERENCE SHOWN TO BE TOTAL MORONS YET AGAIN AFTER FAKE WALZ "PEDO" STORY

Octoputin is real and Walz is probably not a pedo.

It looks like the Russians have literally been at it again, that is interfering in the politics of another state like there is no tomorrow. Just hours after it was revealed that they tried to derail a referendum in Moldova, it has now come out that pedo smears against Democratic VP pick Tim Walz were entirely cooked and spread by the Kremlin and its international network of shills and useful idiots, who look more moronic than ever.

Here's Wired: 

"A Russian-aligned propaganda network notorious for creating deepfake whistleblower videos appears to be behind a coordinated effort to promote wild and baseless claims that Minnesota governor and vice presidential candidate Tim Walz sexually assaulted one of his former students, according to several specialists tracking the disinformation campaign.

Experts believe that the campaign is tied to a network called Storm-1516, which has been linked to, among other things, a previous effort that falsely claimed vice president Kamala Harris perpetrated a hit-and-run in San Francisco in 2011. Storm-1516 has a long history of posting fake whistleblower videos, and often deepfake videos, to push Kremlin talking points to the West."

The smear campaign has been promoted by the usual gang of shills, scumbags, and cretins: 

"Numerous figures in MAGA world boosted the Tim Walz assault claims, including Jack Posobiec, the Pizzagate promoter who is now a member of Trump’s campaign team, and Candace Owens, the popular right-wing podcaster. The claims went viral on X last week, when an anonymous account called Black Insurrectionist posted screenshots of emails from a purported victim."

The campaign traces back to John Dougan, a former Florida cop who now lives in Moscow and runs a network of pro-Kremlin websites.

But the real story here is not that the Kremlin is dumping toxic garbage into the information bloodstream of the West, but that there are still plenty of low-IQ morons, dimwits, and simpletons who unironically respond to revelations of Russian interference in the West with low-grade crap like this and think they are being witty and truthful:

THE AMERICAN ELECTION AND ITS DISCONTENTS

Iconic image of America's weakness

by Colin Liddell

America is often called the "most powerful nation in the world." Sorry, but that's simply bullshit. It's only more powerful in the same way that a cow is more powerful than a man. Make a cow angry and it can trample you to death. Handle it correctly, and you can milk it for years and then turn it into hamburger meat. That's America.

The USA, the one country that emerged strongest from WWII, was the only country that couldn't invite itself to that conflagration. If Japan and then Germany hadn't declared war on the US, then it would probably have had to sit on its hands while the Axis powers continued to carve out their empires.

Another point of American weakness is its so-called "Deep State." Compared to countries that have actual Deep States, like Russia and China, the American Deep State is a shallow puddle. It can't even take out "problematic figures" like Trump or Musk. Meanwhile its rivals, China and Russia can "disappear" millions or arrange plane crashes, poisonings, and defenestrations for anyone, no matter how important. (Also, honourable mention to Israel, which combines an element of democracy with some of the same Deep State ruthlessness we see elsewhere.)

This Western weakness has always been there, while anyone who has tried to counter it, has been vilified and driven into the outer darkness. Remember Senator Joe McCarthy, anyone?

He tried to warn us

This is where we come to the US election. While some see this as an opportunity to refresh the "democratic mandate" and the real basis of America's supposedly "meritocratic" power, that is not how it is seen overseas, where it is viewed more as a kind of holiday from "lame-duck" American influence.

That is certainly how Bibi Netanyahu has been viewing it by going into Gaza, the West Bank, and the Lebanon both feet first.

Also, and increasingly, it is an opportunity for election interference. 

Just a few facts:

• Trump has the backing of Russia. 
• Musk is also on board.
• RFK was a spoiler candidate for the Dems but pulled out and swung behind Trump when he started to appeal to some of the same "crazy" that was fuelling Trump. 
• Jill Stein is now the official Kremlin spoiler candidate for the Dems.
  

Also, the whole thing is working, at least according to the betting markets and the polls in the all-important swing states. 

I might still be wrong, but it looks like Trump is probably going to romp home this time. But even if he somehow fails, the US will be led by an extremely weak leader in Kamala Harris. It's a classic case of "heads I win, tails you lose."

Ameri-bros are quite understandably focused on the trivia of "muh economy" and "muh culture wars," in both of which Trump seems to have a clear advantage (from a normal human being point of view).

But for me, this election is all about the geopolitics and how the political weakness of democratic states -- with their shallow deep states, and their inability to bump off opponents, deal with their own fifth columns, fight dirty wars, or even lie consistently -- stacks up against the anti-democratic states that can do all these unholy things as much as they want. 

Fake news: there is no symmetry between the Deep 

States of democratic and anti-democratic states

A Kamala Harris Presidency would be a vote for the faltering American geopolitical status quo, while a Trump Presidency, far from "Making America Great Again" would see a superpower retreat into isolationism, or at least strengthen those tendencies. 

This is not to criticise or praise such a move, only to mention that there is a certain logic to America's global ebbing. Even at its strongest, it was always the most unimperial of empires that broke down in tears and engaged in naval gazing every time it lost a few thousand men.  

Astroturfed hippy scum fifth columnists freely tolerated

Of course, Trump could refute expectations and even drive a temporary resurgence of American Deep State and "imperial" power, but the likelihood is we'll see less aid for Ukraine, Israel allowed to take a free hand in the Middle East, and even a hollowing out of America's position in the Western Pacific, with the Western admission that Taiwan is part of China becoming less an article of "strategic ambiguity" and more a statement of fact.

In short, we'll see less of a "rules based international system" and more of a geopolitical free-for-all, where states that are ready to spill the blood of their own people and their enemies are optimised for success.

Nations and blocs that are not already like this, will face increasingly pressures to become like this. Meanwhile nations that are not privileged by geography, history, or access to natural resources will need to push all the harder to overcome such setbacks. 

This may prompt the European Union to stand much more on its own feet politically and militarily, and to even grow some geopolitical balls, asserting Europe's traditional hegemony over Africa. It will also increase the pressure on the United Kingdom to rejoin Europe, as the alternative -- being an unneeded US aircraft carrier -- is hardly conducive to self-respect. 

While there is an obvious solution for a Europe faced by the ebbing of a US-backed global system, the case is less clear cut for a nation like Japan, still a densely populated massive economic powerhouse crammed into a relatively small space. Without the taken-for-granted "umbrella" of American nuclear power, Japan will be forced not only to go nuclear itself, but to change its culture into that of a country that can credibly use nuclear weapons. It will have to turn its "samurai spirit" from an outdated tourist attraction into a military reality.

As China and North Korea are reactionary products of aggression by an earlier Japanese state, the future Japanese state will become a reactionary product of the threat posed by the neighbours it helped create. 

Recruitment poster: Is Japan about to weaponise its incels?

In addition to the geopolitical card-shuffling and horse-trading that will follow the death of American-backed globalism, there will also be severe economic consequences. Trade, manufacturing, and raw materials will be looked upon through a lens of geopolitical leverage, rather than in purely profit and consumer-benefit models. The global network of importing from the cheapest producer will increasingly be replaced by a more regional based one.

All this would be on the cards even without Trump.

In the same way that the British Empire dissolved away because it lacked a true ideology to maintain it, so American globalism will fade and die in a similar way.

The British Empire died when the democratic preference for cheap imports trumped the Imperial Preference system that aimed to use tariffs to knit the empire (loosely) together.

The US Empire is dying because the democratic preference for tax cuts and "muh freedoms" trumps the blood and treasure costs of maintaining an effective global system. Only undemocratic states are capable of developing ideologies that can trump the democratic will, and they will be the ones that will pick up the pieces. 

It's in the bag!

____________________

Follow @cbliddell

Colin Liddell is the Chief Editor of Neokrat and the author of Interviews & Obituaries, a collection of encounters with the dead and the famous. As there is absolutely zero reward for honest content like this, support his work by buying his book here (USA), here (UK), and here (Australia). or by taking out a paid subscription on his Substack.

FINAL THOUGHTS ON THE 2024 ELECTION

by Robert Stark

In 2016, Trump’s populist message called out elites and appealed to the forgotten people, mixed in with racial dog whistles. In 2020, Trump ran a more conventionally conservative RNC or Fox News campaign. Trump’s 2024 campaign is more conventionally conservative on economic issues but more overtly racial. Trump’s strategy is to portray Kamala Harris as a Marxist radical leftist rather than part of the establishment oligarchy, as he successfully did with Hillary Clinton in 2016.

A strong argument for Trump is that he causes the political elites to unmask and show their true intentions, though he already accomplished that during his first term. Trump is primarily concerned with staying out of Jail and building a dynasty for his family. Thus Trump is cozying up to oligarchs, in exchange for helping him win. A large portion of oligarchs, such as Mark Zuckerberg and Jamie Dimon, have warmed up to Trump. If Trump is elected, expect massive tax cuts and deregulation for the ultra-wealthy and corporations.

Another case for Trump is that even though he likely won’t accomplish much on policy nor take back America, he can serve as a placeholder or pause America’s decline. The case is that Kamala Harris continuing Biden’s high levels of migration will do irreparable damage to the Nation. Even if Trump doesn’t enact mass deportations, he will likely greatly reduce the number of new migrants. Not to mention that Kamala will likely further weaponize the Justice Department against political opponents and political dissidents.

While there is an argument that Trump is more non-interventionist than Kamala Harris, his recent rhetoric on Iran has been very hawkish, advocating that Israel strike Iran’s nuclear facilities. If anything, Trump will be more hawkish on Iran, though more dovish on Russia. Kamala is backed by liberal internationalists who view Russia as an existential threat while Trump is supported by hardline Zionists who are aggressive toward Iran. The hardline Zionists backing Trump have made a bargain with the MAGA nationalists, that they will accept anti-immigration policies in exchange for a hawkish approach to Iran. Regardless, since Russia and Iran are close allies, war with one entails war with both.

I get the narrative that Kamala Harris is an accelerationist in that she is so bad that she would undermine the system and radicalize a lot of people. While this scenario is plausible, it is also possible that she could be effective in governing as a centrist technocrat. Kamala might cater more to moderate White upper middle class suburbanites than the hard Left. Overall, I expect her to govern similarly to Biden but without the old Democrat labor ties and cozier with Coastal Elites while emphasizing social issues like abortion more.

If Trump wins, White conservatives will go back to being complacent and just grilling, focusing on their jobs, and families. If Kamala wins, expect MAGA to either hyper-radicalize or go into total despair. Things will become hyper-political with various dissident ideologies jockeying to fill the space left by MAGA’s implosion. Trump is better for normies but Kamala is better for people who make dissident politics and intellectualism their life. For instance, the Alt-Right emerged under Obama, fizzled out under Trump, and had somewhat of a resurgence as the dissident right under Biden.

Another argument for Trump is if he is defeated, the pre-Trump Republicans will push for an aggressive comeback. Trump’s defeat would be a symbolic repudiation of nationalism and populism. If Trump wins, expect J.D. Vance to be the frontrunner in 2028 and Glenn Youngkin if Kamala wins.

Hopefully, if MAGA implodes, it can be replaced by something better and more intellectual. Unlike the Democrats, who are ideologically rigid and hierarchical, the GOP is malleable and can be reinvented in the future, much like how MAGA replaced the Reagan/Bush GOP. The chance of the Democrats accepting some of my views is 0% while the chance of my views influencing a GOP politician in the future is maybe 1-2%. A lot of MAGA people are chuds but some of the more intellectual MAGA types are open to my views. I could also see the rightwing of Silicon Valley transforming the GOP to become more technocratic, and Vance might fulfill that role in the future.

Trump energized wokeness while pushing the Left and the establishment together. Under Biden, the woke culture wars chilled out while there is a growing divide between the Left and establishment over Israel and income inequality. Kamala will have to fight a two-front war against MAGA and leftists who view her as complacent for Israel’s siege of Gaza. In contrast, Trump will face a united Left and establishment that seeks to crush him and his supporters.

There is an argument that Trump is overall better for the economy. Primarily, because Trump will ramp up oil production, and cheaper oil means lower inflation, enabling the Fed to keep interest rates lower. However, Trump’s tariffs and tax cuts are inflationary. It is great to see Trump take a serious economic populist stance on capping credit card interest. However, it is probably a gimmick rather than a serious policy.

Trump wants to spend while cutting taxes, while Harris wants to spend even more than Trump while raising taxes. Whoever wins could face an economic crisis which will damage them politically and empower the other party to win in 2028. There is a case that since the Democrats disproportionately created the economic mess, they should stay in power to take the blame.

It is easier for Trump and MAGA to engage in elaborate conspiracy theories about Haitians eating pets than to just say that Haitians can never become Americans, or don’t belong here. Basically, it is negative ethnocentrism without any positive ethnocentrism. There must be a serious discussion about what it means to be an American, and who is an American, and eating the cats and dogs discourse detracts from that, even if they do eat cats in Haiti. The Alt-Right took the position that any kind of racism being normalized is good, but that simply isn’t true.

While White identity needs to be normalized, associating it with crude vulgar racism is low status coded to well-educated Whites, and doesn’t win over new voters. Even Trump saying migrant criminals have bad genes is good as far as normalizing HBD, it is bad in that it associates hereditarianism with crude racism. The big irony is that Trump is losing White voters while winning over more non-Whites. The GOP is becoming a multi-racial prole party, not the White people’s party. While Trump has pushed the Overton window on discussing race and the national question, it is also too incoherent.

Trump is much more incoherent, rambling in his speeches, and does not have the same energy levels as he did in 2016. While Trump’s cognitive decline is nowhere near as bad as Biden’s, it is noticeable. I speculate that Trump had an IQ of 120 in his prime and is now around 110 IQ.

I plan on voting for RFK Jr. as a protest vote, since my vote doesn’t count in California. However, if I lived in a swing state, I might consider tepidly supporting Trump. I have long pushed this radical centrist fusionism between right and left populism. While MAGA becoming a big tent, welcoming left-populists like RFK Jr. and Tulsi Gabbard is generally positive, it also feels a bit incoherent. For instance, I am skeptical that RFK Jr. can pressure Trump to embrace environmentalism.

The Election will be very close and likely one of the closest elections in American history. While Harris has a slight advantage, there is a decent chance Trump will win. Trump is polling better in the Sun Belt while worst in the Rust Belt, which shows he squandered much of his initial electoral success in the Rust Belt. However, Biden’s handling of the hurricane could cost Harris Georgia and North Carolina while Biden alienating Arab American voters over Gaza could cost Harris Michigan. Not to mention if the economy crashes or the Mideast Wars further escalate before the Election. If Trump wins, I will enjoy shitlib tears for a few weeks and then go back to criticizing Trump.

Subscribe to Robert Stark's Substack

"SURRENDER MONKEY" TRUMP TOPS DEI-PICK HARRIS IN PRESIDENTIAL BETTING MARKETS

The candidate on the left is the preferred choice of foreign Deep States

With only 2 0r 3 weeks to go and mail-in voting already well underway, the US Presidential election is incredibly close. However, what is not so close is the result, at least according to the betting markets. 

While polls give DEI-pick Kamala Harris a small lead in overall votes and place the two candidates neck-and-neck in the electoral college, the betting markets are strongly for Donald Trump, who has promised to immediately back off US support for Ukraine so that Putin's zombie meat-wave attacks can prevail.

In fact, the betting markets are back where they were when a floridly senile Joe Biden was the Democratic candidate.

As reported by Forbes:

"The blockchain-based election betting site Polymarket priced in a 60% chance of a Trump victory, breaking the 60% threshold for the first time since late July, days after President Joe Biden bowed out of the race. Other prominent sites which allow users to wager money on the outcome of the election have similar shifts toward Trump: Betfair places a roughly 58% chance at a Trump win, Kalshi 57%, PredictIt 54% and Smarkets 58%. Election Betting Odds, which aggregates implied betting odds across the five major markets, gives Trump a 57% chance at victory, tilting in Trump’s favor by the widest margin since July 29, up from about 48% at the end of September."

The apparent discrepancy between polls and betting markets is possibly explained by the wall-known fact that polls have typically undercounted Trump's support in the past. Also, some analysts believe the result will come down to whichever candidate can mobilise his or her support to actually get out and vote, with Trump holding an advantage with his following of "slightly crazed boomers." 

While a Trump win could severely undermine the geopolitical order in the Ukraine and lead to a victorious and emboldened Russia in Europa, there will also be consequences in the Middle East, where the Israeli government will feel empowered by a Trump victory to take an even more aggressive stance against Iran. 

How a future Trump presidency squares the interests of Russia and its ally Iran with those of Israel will certainly be interesting to watch. 

INDIGENOUS AMERICAN ACTIVISTS "CELEBRATE THEIR OWN CONQUEST" BY USING EUROPEAN SIGN LANGUAGE

Before the White man arrived, native Americans even lacked an effective way to say "fuck you"

Indigenous American activists have been unwittingly celebrating their own conquest and colonisation by Europeans this "Indigenous People's Day" (held Monday 14th Oct) by sharing a meme in which a "Native American" uses an Italian gesture to show disrespect for the Italian who discovered America, Christopher Columbus.

Columbus, of course, was the explorer who first discovered the Americas, a vast area of land of immense potential that was largely going to waste, thanks to an endless savage cycle of petty tribal wars, resulting in civilian murder, enslavement, torture, and cannibalism. 

The meme was intended to show disrespect for the great Italian navigator and the generally high-functioning societies that followed his arrival, but by using a symbol that Columbus himself was familiar with and may even have introduced to the Americas, the meme merely underlines the cultural and intellectual poverty that existed in the New World before Europeans, with their rich and expressive culture of hand signs, turned up. 

VALUED KREMLIN ASSET MARRIED TO "HIS OWN GRANDMOTHER" PASSES AWAY AT EMBARRASSING AGE OF 69

Alex Salmond, a much-valued "Kremlin asset" and general political shit-stirrer with his own program on Putin-shill channel Russia Today, has sadly passed away at the embarrassing age of 69, an age which unfortunately conjures up images of people engaged in disgusting synchronised oral sex (I mean hang on for at least one more year, dude!)

Also embarrassing is the fact that Salmond was married to "his own grandmother" -- not literally, of course, but to a woman 17 years older than him. 

Salmond, known in Kremlin files as "Agent Pelmeni" (Russian for dumpling) and by former schoolmates as "Slimo Salmond" was part of the Soviet-backed "79 Group" that infiltrated the SNP from 1979 to 1982, when it was "officially disbanded" under pressure from the SNP leadership and the Thatcher government. In fact, it continued to operate in the shadows, and actually took over the party just before the collapse of the Soviet Union in 1990, when Salmond became leader and Thatcher resigned. 

A lack of Kremlin support in the 1990s saw Salmond's star wane, and he was ousted in 2000, when he resigned out of the blue. One possible explanation may be that MI5 had some sort of "kompromat" on him, or that the money from Russia simply dried up. But a resumption of Russian support, following Vladimir Putin's rise in the Zeroes, saw Salmond re-installed as SNP leader from 2004-2014, during the SNP's most polarising and divisive phase, leading to the 2014 Referendum that almost broke up the UK. 

Salmond stepped down as leader and First Minister in 2014, with his later years devoted to dealing with embarrassing sex scandals. Although cleared of any criminal acts -- he was not imposing enough to force his attentions on any woman -- the details of the case reveal him to be a pathetic and desperate incel who would try almost anything to get it on with his underlings in the Scottish government. 

A further indication that he was on the Kremlin payroll comes from his hard anti-trans stance. While this would be a natural position for any conservative or even sane person, it is not a natural position for a degenerate Leftist like Salmond, and simply reflects the Kremlin's polarisation tactics which aim to make this a wedge issue in the West.

NIALL FERGUSON HATES HUMANITY

by Colin Liddell

I have no problem with people hating humanity. I think most of us do so from time to time for various erratic reasons, but what I mean here is that Niall Ferguson has developed a cast-iron, rigorous, and logically worked-out academic position in which he essentially hates humanity and wants it to die.

This is clear from an informed viewing of the video above, where the popular historian gives his well-worked schtick to the Triggernometry duo. 

Ferguson, who is now married to a Black Somalian woman, has it all worked out:

"Yes, I am contributing to the browning of the West, and, yes, that's a good thing -- muh two beautiful Black kids. I mean, how would the NHS even function without continuing inflows of brown people... Stopping Africans moving to the West is a doomed enterprise, and, as for 'anti-immigrant' societies, like Viktor Orban's Hungary, that's just cope, bro. They are doomed because they are ageing out. Also, Anglo-Saxons only succeeded because they had the right set of liberal, pro-business ideas, and, guess what, anyone of any skin colour and background, can make use of this intellectual technology."

Great as he is at making these arguments, he also claims that brown people, like his wife or the "fast-tracked-into-safe-seats" Tory leadership hopefuls, like Kemi Badenoch and James Cleverly, are better at making these arguments because he is, after all "just an old dead White guy (Please LOL)."

This is the Ferguson schtick that we have become tediously familiar with over the years. To be honest, the Triggernometry guys try to push back in one or two areas, but all that rugged Scottish (with two passports) intellectual energy, buffed up by a shiny new knighthood, kind of brushes them aside into meek acquiescence.

But there is, nevertheless, a glaring and obvious glitch with the Ferguson mindset that makes it easy even for a midwit to cut him off at the knees. It is this:

The Western society that he champions and whose intellectual technology can be acquired by anyone, has also created the demographic slump that forces it to import the Third World. If Ferguson is right and these brown migrants can all acquire our intellectual technology, then what's to stop them entering into the same demographic death spiral as the West?

Also, Ferguson doesn't want "the West" to only be confined to the West. He sees it as a state of mind that can be re-exported and universalised by Westernised non-Whites, like his wife, back to the countries they came from. Those nations too are ear-marked by Ferguson for his Western demographic death spiral. 

Will the last Westernised brown person with a fertility rate just above 2.1 please put out the lights.

____________________

Follow @cbliddell

Colin Liddell is the Chief Editor of Neokrat and the author of Interviews & Obituaries, a collection of encounters with the dead and the famous. As there is absolutely zero reward for honest content like this, support his work by buying his book here (USA), here (UK), and here (Australia). or by taking out a paid subscription on his Substack.

EVERY, SINGLE, TIME - WOMAN AT HELM OF DOOMED NEW ZEALAND NAVY SHIP

Possible "daddy issues"

Apart from floating mines left over from WWII, giant squid, and large chunks of ice, nothing is more hazardous to shipping than female sailors, especially if, as part of some dumb "diversity drive," they are promoted all the way up to captain.

This age-old truth has been proved once again, following the sinking of the first New Zealand navy ship to go down since WWII.  

HMNZS Manawanui, one of only 5 working ships in the New Zealand Navy, was under the command of Commander Yvonne Gray, when she managed to prang it right into a reef off the coast of Samoa. This was despite the fact that it was a newly upgraded hydrographic survey, salvage, and support ship, with complex sensing equipment. 

Videos and photos published by local media showed the ship listing heavily while on fire. Later it sank. 

The full story of how this vital piece of naval technology was lost has yet to come out, but we can only speculate that it may have been something like the Captain being "on her rag" that week, or getting too involved in a heated discussion over knitting patterns when her fickle female attention should have been on the lurking dangers of the deep.

Other possible causes include disconnecting vital alarm systems because flashing red lights disturbed the "colour scheme" of the command bridge, or "daddy issues."

The need to attract male attention by capsizing in shark infested waters can also not be dismissed as a possible explanation. 

"MUH BRITISH EMPIRE" LARPING STRIKES AGAIN

LARPy

by Colin Liddell

I've seen a lot of girly butthurt in "British nationalist" circles recently about the UK's decision to give up a tiny piece of territory it still holds in the Indian Ocean. The girly butthurt is also incredibly ill-informed on basic geopolitical and diplomatic stuff. 

On a girly butthurt feelz level, there is not much to separate me from other "British Empire nostalgists." It's nice to have little spots of territory dotted around the world that belong to the "Mother Country."

I was in Hong Kong for a few days when it was still under the Union Jack, but to be honest, it didn't feel any less Chinese than it does today. Britain's control in the years before the handover was only nominal, and being a Brit didn't give you any special privileges. Already the Chinese seemed to be in charge. 1997 merely marked the handover from local Chinese control to Beijing control, that's all.

With the Chagos islands and the "British" Indian Ocean Territory, it's something similar. There is nothing at all colonial or "British" about that territory. 

Since decolonisation kicked into high gear in the 1960s, UK governments of whichever stripe made the decision to reduce "overseas commitments" as much as possible. There is a very good technical reason for that, which can simply be called "not letting the door hit your butt on the way out."

European nations unwilling to decolonize have often been the victim of this, the French especially, but also the Dutch, and the Portuguese. The French tried to hang on in Vietnam and Algeria. They have also tried, more recently, to hang on in a "Neo-colonial" sense in parts of the Sahara. All these efforts have seen the French humiliated in one form or another.

The door hitting the French squarely on the butt

The Dutch were also reluctant to leave Indonesia post-WWII, and were therefore pointed in the general direction of Amsterdam by the boots of the natives. The Portuguese too got a drubbing in East Timor, Goa, and Africa from the Indonesians, Indians, and Cubans for trying to hang on too long. 

The problem is small territories (or not so small territories) half-way around the world are no longer cheap or easy to defend, especially for weak, unwarlike Western nations, full of soft youths, universal principles, and dubious fifth columns operated by geopolitical rivals. 

The nature of European colonial empires in essence was "easy expansion at distance against temporarily weak opponents" over "difficult expansion at home against strong opponents." The latter of these two strategies was behind so many of the bloody and fruitless wars in European history. Britain's success as "the largest empire ever" was the implementation of the former strategy to the fullest, something that was made possible by its temporary naval dominance. But this success was ultimately curtailed by the temporary nature of the factors on which it depended.

The only reason the UK is still in the Chagos Islands in the present day is because it holds it as a "front man" for the USA, which believes it is an excellent spot for one of their strategic naval bases.

It has to be emphasised that the UK's so-called "special relationship" with the USA is totally useless when it comes to protecting the remnants of the UK's colonial past in the absence of an additional US motive. The same is largely true of the US's other "special relationships" with other countries.

Back in the 1950s, the US only intervened in French Indochina on the understanding that the French would give up their colonies there; and when fellow-NATO partner Portugal was attacked by Soviet and Cuban-backed forces in Angola and Mozambique in the 1970s, the US of course stayed out of it. 

We see the exact same story with the Argentine attack on the British Falkland Islands in 1982, where a permanent member of the UN Security Council almost got humiliated by a third-rate nation with a few French Exocets. The US, as usual, stood by and let it all happen, while continuing to use numerous British bases around the world for its own geopolitical projection. 

The simple facts sound bad, but the US had to think about its "soft power" position.

After WWII, the world was facing two combined surges of revolution, one "right-wing" in nature, the other "left-wing." The first was the Wilsonian "self-determination" revolution kicked off by WWI that had now, thanks to the weakening of the main colonial nations by WWII, reached the non-European World. Combined with this, there was the left-wing challenge of Communism. 

To stop these potent forces from combining against it, the US had to take a generally anti-colonial stance, emphasise local self-determination, and trust to its economic power and the benefits of a free-trade global system to offer an alternative to the grubby delights of Third World Communism. The results of the Cold War suggest that it largely worked. But now there are additional challenges.

Today Britain has been fully subsumed into this American post-colonial paradigm that emphasises "moral" or "soft" power within an internationally agreed, all-inclusive "rules-based system." It is hoped that this will be enough to contain the rising "large authoritarian" powers, which include China, Russia, and possibly India and Japan in the future.

The idea that Britain can set up on its own and ignore all this tedious diplomatic context and "security infrastructure," and promote its interests in a more hard-edged or autarkic way may be emotionally satisfying, but it is hardly realistic.

Hypothetically and as a bit of a LARP this might sound good on a low-IQ livestream for a few minutes. Yes, let's imagine recreating a mini "Neo-Britsh Empire" of remote outposts, including Pitcairn, Chagos, and our string of tiny isolated Atlantic islands (St Helena, Ascencion, etc.) all the way down to the Falkland Island, South Georgia, and the British Antarctic territory.

Created an Empire, forgot to evolve an ideology to go with it

But in actuality this would require some sort of weird state with authoritarian, "fascist," or "Zionist" characteristics that would be prepared to threaten larger countries with nuclear weapons if they impinged on our far-flung outposts. Probably not very workable beyond the LARPing. 

As for the present tawdry deal over the British Indian Ocean Territories, a deal that was the work of previous Tory administrations and the British Deep State, it preserves Britain's soft power, for what that's worth, while also ensuring that the islands will continue to be used for American hard power purposes for the next hundred years. 

It is not impossible that a future Britain may once again require resources and living space abroad, but any such scheme will have to be thought out, coldly and logically, according to the most rigorous principles of geopolitics, and not as some emotional reaction to the changed diplomatic status of a US naval base thousands of miles from the UK.

____________________

Follow @cbliddell

Colin Liddell is the Chief Editor of Neokrat and the author of Interviews & Obituaries, a collection of encounters with the dead and the famous. As there is absolutely zero reward for writing honest content like this, support his work by buying his book here (USA), here (UK), and here (Australia). or by taking out a paid subscription on his Substack.